PDA

View Full Version : IOR Valdada 2.5-10x FFP Optic



gatordev
27 November 2012, 12:39
I thought I'd offer a small review of one of the many optic choices out there. I've gathered valuable info from this site and thought I'd try and pay back, even if it's only a little. I offer this only as my experience and don't mean it to be definitive.

My shooting background, to give perspective and/or for people to decide to ignore my opinion: I'm a recreational shooter who tries to shoot rifle or pistol 2-3 weekends a month. I compete in monthly local competitions (nothing sponsored) and do fairly well, but enjoy learning how to be better. I am military, but don't carry a rifle for a living and don't get to shoot the guns (the guys in back do), I just tell them when to fire. I enjoy the sport because there's always more to learn and room for improvement.

Okay, that's out of the way, I thought I'd share my take on the IOR 2.5-10 MIL/MIL FFP Optic. This was purchased through Rainier for the best price (and in stock) I found. I was new to precision shooting (still am) when I got this scope and it's my second variable optic, the first was a much cheaper but decent Millet that I started to learn with and later sold to help fund the IOR. I've mounted the IOR on a Noveske LW 18" SS upper with a Larue LT-104. Initially, I zeroed the rifle and got familiar with the optic. A few weeks later, I ran the gun in a Magpul SPR class (which was fantastic). We shot from 100 out to 630 meters in the class, with varying distances in between. The scope performed flawlessly in the class and subsequent trips to the range or out to the desert (local, not bad guy land). I've shot 745 rounds with this scope (1040 through the rifle, total) in the last 6 months or so. Here's some Pros and Cons I've come to:

PROS:

-Clear optics. I don't have a lot to compare it to, but I didn't find myself straining to see "through" the optic. I've shot in conditions that have ranged from 200-300m visibility in fog as well as clear skies and sunlight. I'm sure it's not the best, but I'm happy with the image when zoomed in (more on that in the Cons).

-Reticle graduations. It has both 1 and .5 mil graduations close to the center and then .25 mil marks out towards the edges. This greatly helps with range estimation rather than trying swag it with .5 mils.

-First Focal Plane. My previous optic was SFP and I decided it was worth the money to get a FFP optic when I upgraded. I'm very glad I did. It's so much easier to use holds if shooting in an unconventional position and you don't want to be zoomed in all the way to help with weapon sway. 1.6 mil Up equals 300 m, regardless of zoom. Absolutely necessary? No. But a nice luxury.

-Weight. It's fairly lightweight and not ridiculously long. It also seems to be fairly robust. I haven't tried to bang it around too hard, nor does it really see all that much hard use, but it does get knocked against a rock or the ground when I go shoot out in the desert and I'm setting up.

CONS:

-Reticule. This is personal preference, or what I'm finding is becoming personal preference, so take it for what it's worth. With the cheaper Millet I had as well as my ACOG, I've found I prefer both a thinner vertical and horizontal line as well as an actual intersection at the center point of the crosshair. This particular optic has a dot in the center. I believe it's a .1 or .2 mil dot, so it still can be useful, but it also has the potential to cover a bullseye or small target at some ranges and/or magnification. Definitely something that can be overcome, but just preference on my part.

-Low zoom "tunnel vision." When down below ~3.5x, you'll get black boarders around the image caused by the tube. I knew this when I bought it and I can't say I'm down below 3.5-4x much on a longer range gun, so I didn't think it was a big deal. So far, it hasn't been. Scope still functions 100%, even with the tunnel vision.

-No zero-stop. Not a huge deal at the ranges I'm able to shoot at, but if I was shooting farther, I could see it being an inconvenience. I don't know what I'm missing, so I guess I'm not missing it yet.

-Small reticule when zoomed out. This is a result of the optic being FFP. It comes with the design, but figured I'd mention it for completeness sake. To me, the benefits of FFP outweigh this.

Overall, I've been very happy with my purchase. I was trying to put a picture up (albeit a crappy cell phone pic), but my work computer system is causing issues with Photobucket.

Paulo_Santos
27 November 2012, 14:30
I had one of those years ago. Definitely one of my favorite scopes. Wish I never got rid of it.

gatordev
27 November 2012, 17:36
I had one of those years ago. Definitely one of my favorite scopes. Wish I never got rid of it.

Apparently there were a few short-comings with the older models that they've since addressed. Still, a capable optic, either way.

Now that I'm home, here's a simple pic. No Stickman quality, for sure.

http://i840.photobucket.com/albums/zz322/gatordev/SPR.jpg